BIAFF what a laugh.

A forum for sharing views on the art of film, video and AV sequence making as well as on competitions, judging and festivals.
Post Reply
ron jarrett

BIAFF what a laugh.

Post by ron jarrett » Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:15 pm

I now know that my 2006 film was awarded a Bronze+ I email this to all of
the cast and crew members.
For myself ,my first film was a silver award, the cast understood and were
delighted as was the crew (Medway Camcorder Club) The second year I entered
the very first film I had made and I recieved a blue award, I wasn't at all
impressed with the judges comments because one had made an assumption that
was totally wrong and I guess based the rest of their judgement on that making
them entirely irrelevant. The second judge said the music was unsuitable
but as the film was of the broken and vandalised grave Angels in the local
churchyard and the music was 'time to say goodbye' I was more than a little
non plussed.

Back to the 'bronze + what a silly award this is and trying to explain the
plus bit to the cast was embarassing....most said if it was very neally a
silver why not give it a silver if it was not a silver why not give it a
bronze.

My sentiments entirely, a gold is a gold, a silver is a silver and a bronze
is a bronze and why have a blue?. This amateurism meddling with the accepted
awards throughout a range of activities devalues the whole process....at
least that what I think, or should the Committee be taking another look at
this?

Dave Watterson

Re: BIAFF awards - to plus or not to plus

Post by Dave Watterson » Sun Feb 19, 2006 6:06 pm

"ron jarrett" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
Back to the 'bronze + what a silly award this is and trying to explain the
plus bit to the cast was embarassing....most said if it was very neally
a
silver why not give it a silver if it was not a silver why not give it a
bronze.
Historically the awards got their names because IAC happened to have some
posh seals which they could stick onto certificates. Thus instead of "commended",
"highly commended" and so on, they developed the blue, bronze, silver and
gold seal awards. Those did - and in their new form still do - serve as
bench-marks indicating the general ability of the film maker as demonstrated
by the movie concerned. The traditional competition for prizes starts with
the golds - up to eight may get International Standard medallions and then
there are the special awards for humour, documentary etc.

In earlier days blue did mean something important - we also had a "certificate
of entry" which was like getting recognition for putting your name at the
top of an exam paper. In the cine days (sprockets etc) you could get some
really dire entries. Blue means that you have got beyond the very beginning
stage of pointing the camera at a subject - and started to make a movie out
of it. I think "promising" sums it up neatly.

Last year IAC ran out of seals! Rather than buy more at high cost, they decided
to rename the levels. Thus blue seal became blue standard etc.

But at the same time IAC decided it was time to tackle a change in the general
quality of entries. Modern camcorders and NLE editing mean that the very
lowest quality of movie scarcely exists any more. I happen to think our film
makers have also improved. A far higher proportion of the entries are coming
into the middle-to-good group covered by bronze and silver. It did not seem
helpful to lump all those people together, especially as it would be hard
for them to see any improvement in their rating. Hence the introduction of
the "plus" categories: get a bronze this time and a bronze plus next year
and you have a good sign that you are improving.

But what do others think? Should we change the names, introduce more colours
(taupe trophy anyone?) Or should we not try to make distinctions between
the scores of people whose work falls into the bronze category or into the
silver category?

All ideas welcome ...

Dave

tom hardwick

Re: BIAFF what a laugh.

Post by tom hardwick » Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:40 am

I wasn't at all
impressed with the judges comments because one had made an assumption that
was totally wrong and I guess based the rest of their judgement on that
making
them entirely irrelevant.
Hi Ron,

I wasn't a judge of the competition this year but in previous years some
films have presented different meanings to different People. Last year's
winner 'Passing By' was seen by many different people who all read something
different into the story line, and only when the filmmaker herself was interviewed
did the true meaning come to light.

This didn't stop it winning the top award though, so some intrigue is obviously
a good thing. I'm sure the filmmaker forgave the wrong assumptions made
by her (human) judges because of her success, and as such I hope you're spurred
on by this news.

What about including a synopis with your next film? Nothing wrong with that
- every paperback book we pick up has the rear cover doing just that - feeding
the reader snippets from the plot.

tom.

graeme webb - Borderline

Re: BIAFF what a laugh.

Post by graeme webb - Borderline » Tue Feb 21, 2006 10:18 am

"ron jarrett" <forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
The second judge said the music was unsuitable
but as the film was of the broken and vandalised grave Angels in the local
churchyard and the music was 'time to say goodbye' I was more than a little
non plussed.
Ron

I have been a bit non plussed about the whole debate concerning the suitability
or not of a piece of music and what an individual judge thinks is approriate
(not just in music but in every other aspect of the film judging area as
well). I have sat through a few demos of cheesy 'Royalty Free' music and
then unfortunatly sat through a few films that have used the same tracks,
you know the sort of thing, sections of Vivaldi's 'Four seasons' against
a backdrop of someones holiday video of the Lake district. Now a judge may
find that acceptable but I would find that inappropriate and quite offensive
:)) Its like the font 'thing' in titles. I think ariel or a gil sans is very
readable as a title white on black, but a judge may feel a pulsating green
comic sans on a yellow background is appropriate for this holiday film.

Lets face it it must be quite hard to recruit people to judge these films,
I certainly couldn't sit through what they have to, so maybe they get a bit
'snow blind' after a while.

Maybe someone could shed some light on this and maybe direct me to the instructions
that are given to the judges that would be interesting.

On the subject of grey, bronze + etc.

I think a straight bronze, silver and gold + the top trophy is enough. If
your film is not good enough for a bronze then you don't get anything.

Graeme
Borderline

Ned C

Re: BIAFF what a laugh.

Post by Ned C » Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:29 pm

Your paragraph sums up the situation of judging, in spite of what may be
said decisions are made on the basis of the judges preferences (prejudices
if they are different to your views), you have neatly summed it all up, if
the judge likes pulsating green titles and Vivaldi in the Lakes then your
Arial and specially composed score will be deadly boring and reported as
such. On the other hand if you were judging then we know where your preferences
(prejudices) lie. We have to accept that judging is NOT a science, there
are no absolutes and you are at the mercy of the judges. We win some we lose
some often with the same film.

I agree that awards for everyone devalues the Festival.

Ned C

sections of Vivaldi's 'Four seasons' against
a backdrop of someones holiday video of the Lake district. Now a judge may
find that acceptable but I would find that inappropriate and quite offensive
:)) Its like the font 'thing' in titles. I think ariel or a gil sans is
very
readable as a title white on black, but a judge may feel a pulsating green
comic sans on a yellow background is appropriate for this holiday film.

Lets face it it must be quite hard to recruit people to judge these films,
I certainly couldn't sit through what they have to, so maybe they get a
bit
'snow blind' after a while.

Maybe someone could shed some light on this and maybe direct me to the instructions
that are given to the judges that would be interesting.

On the subject of grey, bronze + etc.

I think a straight bronze, silver and gold + the top trophy is enough. If
your film is not good enough for a bronze then you don't get anything.

Graeme
Borderline

graeme webb - Borderline

Re: BIAFF what a laugh.

Post by graeme webb - Borderline » Tue Feb 21, 2006 4:34 pm

On the other hand if you were judging then we know where your preferences
(prejudices) lie
Your right Ned, Thats another reason I couldn't be a judge :))

Post Reply